RE: Odp: Re: [squid-users] how to apply epoll-2_5 patch to squid2.5-stable9

The updated patch is available in both locations that you have mentioned.
CVS does get updated quicker than the web site (the web site sync's with CVS
periodically).

Steven

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sally Huang [mailto:sallyhsl@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 12:03 PM
>
> Thanks a lot. I send to a wrong email address last time.
>
> Where is the lastest epoll patch that solved the
> "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on fd=197" problem?
> Is it in squid src tagged with epoll-2.5 in squid CVS? Or, is it in
> the patch from
> http://devel.squid-cache.org/cgi-bin/diff2/epoll-2_5.patch?s2_5?
>
> sally
>
> On 5/11/05, Steven Wilton <swilton@q-net.net.au> wrote:
> > I did manage to trace the cause of the
> "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on
> > fd=197" messages. The latest epoll patch fixes this problem.
> >
> > There are 2 messages that the new patch will cause to
> appear with the
> > default debug options (ALL,1):
> >
> > storeClientCopy3: <url> - clearing ENTRY_DEFER_READ
> >
> > This is caused when an object has been deferred, and for
> some reason the
> > memory has not been freed, even though all clients have
> seen all in-memory
> > parts of the url. I can't see why this would be the case,
> and I'm sure it's
> > not caused by the epoll code, but the epoll code needs to catch this
> > condition.
> >
> > WARNING defer handler for fd=<fd>(<url>) does not call
> commDeferFD() -
> > backing off manually.
> >
> > This is caused when an object has data ready to be read,
> and the defer
> > handler reports that the read should be deferred, but does
> not tell the
> > epoll code to back off. This debug would probably be very
> noisy if used
> > with delay pools, but other than that it indicates a
> non-optimised defer
> > handler.
> >
> > These two debug statements do not produce a large number of
> entries in the
> > debug logs (181 and 52 messages respectively out of 3204
> messages total in
> > one of our proxy server's cache.log out of a total of ~4.2 million
> > requests). The proxy server does handle these cases
> appropriately, but they
> > indicate sub-optimal performance. As they represent a tiny
> fraction of the
> > total number of requests, I have not spent any time working
> out the exact
> > cause of these problems.
> >
> > Regards
> > Steven
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sally Huang [mailto:sallyhsl@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 9:34 AM
> > > To: Henrik Nordstrom
> > > Cc: squid-users@squid-cache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Odp: Re: [squid-users] how to apply epoll-2_5
> > > patch to squid2.5-stable9
> > >
> > > Thanks for your clarify.
> > >
> > > The author doesn't reply me. Could you pls do me a favor and check
> > > with the author whether he has updated the latest epoll
> patch so that
> > > everyone won't face this "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL):
> failed on fd=197"
> > > problem?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > sally
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/10/05, Henrik Nordstrom <hno@squid-cache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 10 May 2005, Sally Huang wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Do you mean the " epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on
> fd=197" bug
> > > > > isalready fixed on both epoll-2_5 patch and epoll-2.5
> branch in
> > > > > squidCVS?
> > > >
> > > > I am the wrong person to answer that question, but as you I
> > > remember the
> > > > branch author mentioning that there has been fixes in that area.
> > > >
> > > > I answerd to the question how you could get the latest
> > > version of the
> > > > epoll branch.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Henrik
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release
> Date: 5/10/2005
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date:
> 5/10/2005
> >
> >
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 5/10/2005
>
>

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 5/10/2005